Army punches back in intelligence network battle

The soldiers responded to the complaints of three service members who two weeks ago told POLITICO the system crashes several times per shift and requires 15 to 20 steps to perform simple tasks like loading maps. The three service members also said troops operating in remote locations in Afghanistan often don’t have access to up-to-date instruction manuals and that bandwidth problems have made it difficult to get much use out of DCGS.

“I’ve been using DCGS for multiple deployments now,” countered Sgt. 1st Class William Freund, a senior analyst who has used the system extensively in Afghanistan. “I haven’t actually seen DCGS crash.”

Text Size

-

+

reset

Freund has spent more than a year using competing software made by the California company Palantir, which has pushed to get the Army to buy its product despite concerns about whether it conforms to the service’s standards for interoperability. On his last deployment, Freund said, “I had a Palantir laptop that crashed.”

“I’ve actually never had any issues loading maps,” Freund explained. “On every computer system and on the Web portal, there’s always the most up to date how-to PowerPoint slides.”

The soldiers on the conference call said they preferred DCGS over Palantir because DCGS makes it easier to share intelligence with other units and other services and provides more options for creating customized symbols on maps to represent different variables, such as specific types of IED attacks and firefights.

DCGS includes a variety of applications that allow soldiers to complete myriad tasks. Palantir’s software is designed to perform some of those tasks, including link analysis — the process of drawing connections among variables, such as the locations of past IED attacks.

“I’ve used Palantir — I like it,” Freund said. “It’s really good for quick links of individuals. But really the background data behind those links is not necessarily there. And it’s difficult to share.”

But the service members who discussed DCGS with POLITICO two weeks ago — under the condition of anonymity because they weren’t authorized to meet with a reporter — said Palantir was easier to use and allowed them to quickly develop intelligence that led to the interdiction of individuals carrying out IED attacks.

Using DCGS, said an Army reservist, the same tasks would have taken “a huge amount of time.”

For its part, the company has waged a behind-the-scenes campaign in support of its software, spending $270,000 on lobbying during the first three months of the year, according to records filed with the Senate, up from $200,000 during the last three months of 2012. Palantir hasn’t responded to repeated requests for comment.

Hunter has previously accused the Army of making it difficult for commanders in Afghanistan to get their hands on the commercial product and of altering an internal report that initially recommended expanded use of the software. But Army officials say they’ve allowed units in Afghanistan to have Palantir’s software at the request of commanders.

And several of the soldiers on the conference call said it can be a useful tool when used in conjunction with DCGS.

“DCGS is the tool set that the Army has chosen,” said Chief Warrant Officer Erin Epp, an intelligence technician who has been using the system for more than a decade.

“But all those systems are tools,” she added. “The analyst is the one that can really bring that information to life and make it meaningful.”